IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp-04

"Holland, Jake" <jholland@akamai.com> Wed, 25 March 2020 10:22 UTC

Return-Path: <jholland@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 502003A0CB2; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:22:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XQT2CUYsZhf0; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 008D93A0CA5; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:22:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050093.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02PAETI2011485; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:22:34 GMT
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=aQjz0IeikWmaUSOaU6TEusQXtzyE6gSafkYXMW21his=; b=VrkjG+sYHEq7fAEefJF5NSunI2R7UZ4roBPPOIa4i3W+0tsv70+NFErd3gESyfv6uo/C jqiA/XNma5kOiJM2iXlv1R5rYKcSSsxz1TTl1Y3PR3e4U+y6bQ25tiJi74vGA3tjC9d5 pfPWMz9mLVkoDR6U1vkFvRLvvWShxKD3obPAsIi2dPhq9NuPocsJtrug0KeXg4dhfU9/ CdpKdxPX1V7l6r0JWn+RRZXcdg7h4VXoWoVjVmGY4p62gi94Sm63r3ByRjeShUjKIc1v XOdXYtvPdX8oTF2Qs9lMWhBlWIRrmPN0sfRKQnzKhXc60lJDOaiW2jo29aTBQi9ruSn6 Kw==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint6 (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [184.51.33.61] (may be forged)) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2yyt8fjfrm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:22:34 +0000
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02PAHSRk021169; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 06:22:33 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.31]) by prod-mail-ppoint6.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2ywe8v53w4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 25 Mar 2020 06:22:32 -0400
Received: from usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.65) by usma1ex-dag1mb2.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 06:22:32 -0400
Received: from usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.65]) by usma1ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.65]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 06:22:32 -0400
From: "Holland, Jake" <jholland@akamai.com>
To: "Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de>, Michael Tuexen <tuexen@fh-muenster.de>, tcpm IETF list <tcpm@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp@ietf.org" <draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp-04
Thread-Index: AQHV+9Pb2TN51xBbVkiZmhVoyaYX66hYd+6AgADruQD//5D7gA==
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:22:31 +0000
Message-ID: <172DC1FF-8F50-478C-AA3E-0E1A9BAADC02@akamai.com>
References: <ACE60B78-42E2-4932-86EA-14921A1D05D9@fh-muenster.de> <CE61D62B-44CA-4F69-B1EC-3F2C13B244D4@akamai.com> <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2DA3AF3D@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de>
In-Reply-To: <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2DA3AF3D@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.35.20030802
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.80.233]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <A4A0EFC4D81D544B8C7841FC24DDB87E@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-25_04:2020-03-24, 2020-03-25 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-2002250000 definitions=main-2003250089
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-25_04:2020-03-23, 2020-03-25 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1011 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=985 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003250086
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/Cp0hjnkTD0Ehb0TYIeY9ulPlYOQ>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-scharf-tcpm-yang-tcp-04
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:22:45 -0000

Hi Michael,

On 3/25/20, 3:00 AM, "Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de> wrote:
> The results are summarized on slide 3 in
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-tcpm-yang-groupings-for-transmission-control-protocol-tcp-configuration-01.
>
> The stacks I analyzed for that slide were Linux, FreeBSD and Windows and existing YANG models from Cisco IOS-XE. We could add a table with such information e.g. to an appendix of the I-D. Would such a comparison table in the I-D help to address your concern?

I think this would be a helpful addition during evaluation of the draft, though
I won't insist on it.  I'm ambivalent on whether it's got enough value to include
in the final RFC, since much of it will presumably go out of date at some point.

> If no other implementation emerges, my own plan would be to develop such an app at least as proof-of-concept before a WGLC in TCPM and to report the findings so that they can be documented e.g. in the shepherd write-up. Would this plan work for you? 
>
>> I just don't know which of those situations is closer to being the case
>> here. 
>
> I would argue that we are closer to the second situation. But, of course, there is only so much authors of a document can do when it comes to running code.

Great, that addresses my concerns.

I support adoption, I think a standardized set of config and stats for TCP
would be very useful and could dramatically improve portability.

Thanks and regards,
Jake

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email